Uncertainty and robustness in composite indices rankings
The choice of specific weights for the variables included in composite indices is a most difficult topic that might involve deep ethical considerations. In face of such a daunting task, a group of decision-makers might be uncertain and prefer to allow for a certain degree of weights underspecification. However, allowing for larger sets of admissible weights might lead to increasingly different admissible rankings. In this paper we introduce an axiomatically characterized ranking distance function that is used to explore the pace at which the dissimilarity between different admissible rankings increases as the set of admissible weights that the decision-makers are willing to accept becomes gradually large. This can be very useful in many areas of the social sciences to assess the reliability and robustness of any ranking derived from the values of composite indices when the choice of a specific weighting scheme is controversial. Copyright 2012 Oxford University Press 2011 All rights reserved, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 64 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://oep.oupjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:64:y:2012:i:1:p:57-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.